The US strikes against Syria haven’t started yet. President Obama’s Rose Garden statement and the fact Congressional leaders are being briefed on the intelligence tomorrow suggest that there’ll be no strikes today. (Update, 19.00: Obama has now said he’s going to seek authorisation from Congress before acting, meaning they’ll be no strikes until both chambers have voted in favour).
When assessing the consequences for the ‘special relationship’ of Britain not being involved, we need to remember why the Americans are acting. They’re doing so largely because Obama declared that chemical weapons use by Assad was a red line. For the sake of America’s credibility in the world, he has to show that crossing the red lines he imposes has consequences.
This means that the US-led strikes will be limited. One consequence of this is that Britain sitting on the sidelines matters less. If the Americans were intent on regime change and boots on the ground, they would mind this country’s absence from the fight a lot more.
Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate, free for a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first month free.
UNLOCK ACCESS Try a month freeAlready a subscriber? Log in